Re: Raising the SCRAM iteration count
Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org>
From: "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-12-15T00:00:54Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 12/14/22 6:52 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 01:59:04PM -0500, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: HA-256 that we will just need to pick up? > >>> The attached v2 has the GUC rename and a change to GUC_REPORT such that the >>> frontend can use the real value rather than the default. I kept it for super >>> users so far, do you think it should be a user setting being somewhat sensitive? >> >> No, because a user can set the number of iterations today if they build >> their own SCRAM secret. I think it's OK if they change it in a session. >> >> If a superuser wants to enforce a minimum iteration count, they can write a >> password_check_hook. (Or we could add another GUC to enforce that). > > Hm? check_password_hook does not allow one to recompile the password > given by the user, except if I am missing your point? My point is you can write a hook to reject the password if the iteration count is "too low". Not to re-hash the password. Thanks, Jonathan
Commits
-
Test SCRAM iteration changes with psql \password
- bf5a894c5571 16.0 landed
-
Make SCRAM iteration count configurable
- b577743000cd 16.0 landed